The advocates for the common interpretation might here reproach the dull and short fighted prophet, (as they do those who build upon him) and afk how he could doubt the certainty and reality of a fact, which had been fo precisely and circumftantially affirmed in the book of Job?

If the profperity of the wicked, and the fufferings of the righteous in the prefent life, are clearly folved in this book upon the principle of a future ftate; whence comes it, that the prophet Jeremiah was, after the most grave and ferious deliberation, utterly unable to account for this inequality? "Righ"teous art thou, O Lord, when I plead with thee, yet let me talk with thee of thy judgments; Wherefore doth the way of the "wicked profper? Wherefore are all they happy "that deal very treacherously?" (xii. 1.) It is hardly poffible that he fhould have been thus embarraffed, if the answer lay before his eyes in the book of Job, and was there applied to the solution of this very difficulty ?

Ezekiel was carried by the Spirit into a valley full of dry bones, and asked this queftion, Son of man, can thefe dry bones live? Would God have propofed fuch a • Ezek. xxxvii. 3.

queftion,

question to a prophet brought up in the knowledge and belief of the refurrection? or would not Ezekiel have answered Yes, without hesitation, if he had feen the doctrine revealed in these words, Though after my skin, worms deftroy this body, yet in my flesh fhall I fee God; which teach that dry bones were to be restored to life? And yet he was confounded and surprised at the ftrangeness of the demand b

Thus David, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, feem to have profited but little by this text in the book of Job, fince they were as much embarrassed with the circumstance of the inequality, as if they had never seen any plain defcription of this Gospel-article.

Of the many paffages produced, in our first chapter, from the New Teftament, which might be employed to the ruin of my Lord Bishop's expofition; I fhall here felect a few,

This paffage is often produced to prove, that the Jews had the knowledge of the refurrection. It might have been alledged with more plaufibility, tho' not with much more pertinence, (for it has nothing to do with a refurrection) had the words run thus in the affirmative, "Thefe dry bones fhall live." But they are put by way of interrogation; and neither the question propofed, nor the answer given, will allow us to fuppofe that the doctrine of the refurrection was known at that time.

and leave the advocates of the common system to apply the reft at their leisure.

His Lordship maintains that these words of Job are "a ftrong prophecy of the character "and office of Jefus Christ," or a plain prophetical defcription of the grand article "of the Gofpel."

If the grand article of the Gospel was clearly revealed to the Jews in the book of Job; how could they be faid to fit in the region and Shadow of death; or to have been "all their life time through fear of death fubject to bondage ?"

On this fuppofition how could the author of the epiftle to the Hebrews affirm, that the way to heaven was not made manifeft under the Law that the better hopes of the Gospel were

brought in AFTERWARDS and that the good tidings of falvation BEGAN FIRST to be spoken by Jefus Chrift?

According to my Lord Bishop's interpretation, the way to heaven had been made. manifeft, and the better hopes of the Gospel had been brought in, long before the giving of the Law and Jefus Chrift was so far from being the first, that he was one of the later teachers of this doctrine.

• P. 227, 228.

St.

St. Paul tells us, that the principle of justification by faith in Jefus Christ was not revealed to the Jewish church. And yet my Lord Bishop affures us, that this very principle, or the grand article of the Gospel, was strongly foretold, and plainly revealed to the Arabians and Jews, in the book of Job.

In his epiftle to Titus, he says, God's purpose of restoring mankind to life and immortality, "was manifefted in due time," or in that particular age of the world. But, according to his Lordship, the due time of revealing this mystery was in the age of Job, or even before this period.

The apoftle likewife tells us, that Mofes and the Prophets were only Minifters of the letter that killeth, and not of the Spirit which giveth life. But can we imagine that they would have been limited to the letter, if the Spirit of the Law had been at that time opened and unfolded in the book of Job? If the redemption of mankind by the Son of God was fo clearly manifested in the book of Job, how could St. Paul so often style it a myftery?

What mystery could there be, to hide from ages and generations, if the falvation of the whole race of mankind, both Jews and Gen

à Romans, iii. 21, 22. Galatians, iii. 23.
N 3

tiles,

tiles, had been all along clearly revealed to the Arabians and Jews in the book of Job?

My Lord Bishop to establish his interpretation, must contrive to explain away these several authorities and facts, produced from the Old and New Teftament. For whatever

he

may be pleased to fay of a plain prophetical defcription of the doctrine of the resurrection, the paffages alledged above, will be fufficient to convince every candid and attentive reader, that David, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and St. Paul, did not understand the text in queftion, in the fame fenfe with his Lordship.

But, further, permit me to obferve, as a matter of the utmost confequence, that his Lordship's expofition of this text would undermine his whole fcheme concerning the gradual order and progression of the ancient prophecies.

He supposes, that these words are "aftrong prophecy of the character and office of Jefus Chrift," or "a plain prophetical de"fcription of the grand article of the Gof" pel "."

But he is fo candid and equitable withal, as to confefs, that these words thus interpreted, afford" a clearer, and more diftinct Difcourfes on prophecy, p. 227, 228.

knowledge